College and Research Libraries 520 I College & Research Libraries • November 1975 archives are not described whereas Tanza- nia's poor ones are. Information provided by Panofsky and his judgments about material must be used with caution. Often, he shows poor judg- ment or gives misleading information. He highly praises a bibliography that has never been published, is five to ten years out of date, has been superseded by several pub- lished guides, and is available only in the Indiana University Library! Also, The American Historical Review is not a good source to refer readers to for reviews of African a. Sometimes he is simply wrong. For ex- ample, he states: "There is no single com- prehensive retrospective bibliography of Uganda" (p.212). But there is: Terence K. Hopkins, A Study Guide for Uganda, 1969, 162p. Or again, "Swahili . - . . is the first language of some 88 percent of the popula- tion on the mainland [Tanzania]" (p.214). Not true. There are at least 100 Bantu lan- guages which are the first languages of 88 percent of the people of Tanzania. For the subject I know best-colonialism -Panofsky is inadequate. To cover "Colo- nial Times" (p.68), he cites one book-on explorers! The section on "Colonial Pow- ers" (p.119-34) is better, but Great Britain which had the largest empire in Africa is covered in one paragraph, half of which is taken up discussing the Seychelles! Belgian documentation fares a little better-he cites one article describing Belgian documenta- tion centers. The reader has no way of knowing that material on the colonial powers is also to be found in parts one, two, and three, because there are no cross- references anywhere in this volume (except to Duignan's Guide) I In his sections on co- lonialism, Panofsky · manages to ignore the massive two volumes on British, French, and German colonialism edited by Gifford and Louis and the five-volume series, Co- lonialism in Africa, published by the Cam- bridge University Press, not to mention the work of numerous African historians. Another flaw in this bibliography is the author's penchant for mixing up names. Never mind the simple misspellings of which there are many. More serious · is the confusion about peoples' names. It is not Colin Flint; it is either John Flint or Colin Flight. It is not Harm De Bley; it is either Harm de Blij or Helmut Bley. Almost as ir- ritating are inconsistencies in citing names and titles. J. D. Pearson is listed four differ- ent ways; still he does not make the index in even one of these variant forms. Panofsky's writing is tendentious and awkward. Misstatements occur with dis- concerting frequency. While there is much sound information in the bibliography, the volume must nevertheless be used cautious- ly and critically, for its coverage, judg- ments, references, and updatedness are er- ratic. --The index is a joke. In a book which cites perhaps 4,000 names, titles, institutes, series, and serials, the index runs to under 400 entries! Clearly this is not a book that can casually be put into the hands of stu- dents-let alone faculty.-Peter Duignan, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. Foskett, D. J. Classification and Indexing in the Social Sciences. 2d ed. London: Butterworths, 197 4. 202p. £ 5.00. (LC 75-308709) (ISBN 0-408-70644-9) A decade ago Foskett's work belonged on the required reading list of every librari- an and social scientist. Today, as a newly "revised" edition, it is simultaneously fasci- nating and outmoded. Those stimulating ideas that were well summarized and re- viewed in an earlier issue of this journal (C&RL 26:253-54, May 1965) have been preserved. Through the description of the interests of the social scientist and the lucid explanations of the capabilities and intrica- cies of indexing and classification, the au- thor develops a base for mutual respect and closer collaboration between librarians and social scientists. Indeed, improvement of li- brarian-scientist communication is Foskett's main purpose. Unfortunately, this revision comes just ahead of a quantum jump in the activities of analysis and bibliographic control of so- cial science literature. Although billed on the dust jacket as "considerably revised and updated," Foskett fails to rewrite hi's discus- sions of "mechanical indexing and retrieval, and other chapters so as to make the re- vision worthy of the original ideas. His in- terest in the Social Science Citation Index is limited to two paragraphs unnaturally grafted to older text. On-line data bases are presented as potential future developments. It is here that the arguments become un- convincing. Foskett's premise is that an ef- fective classificatory scheme needs to sur- round the organization of knowledge. To an American steeped in the alphabetical in- -dex tradition, the premise is enlightening and its presentation superb. However, when one examines such sophisticated tools as the HRAF Press' A Cross-Cultural Summary, Foskett's denial of the computer's present ability and or its future utility begins to grow suspect. Like the text, the bibliographies of each chapter have been updated unevenly. Carl White's Sources of Information in the Social Sciences appears, but it is the 1964 edition that is listed. No mention is made of the 1973 revision. The H: W. Wilson Compa- ny's Social Sciences Index retains the name of its grandparent: International Index. In some chapters the bibliographies represent a valuable source of new ideas (many of which are not discussed in the text), while in other chapters few new references are provided. After eleven years Foskett is able to re- peat, almost verbatim, his entire conclusion which nears its end with the thought that "much closer collaboration between special- ists and librarians" is still required. In 1963 Foskett discovered the intellectual base of the librarian's work. His first edition pro- jected the feeling of being at the edge of new thoughts. His rejection of the computer as a useful tool for the librarian might have been justified in that work of the early 1960s. Now, in the mid 1970s, Foskett has changed little. He continues to emphasize work done in 1960 and 1961. While his conclusion may still be valid, the evidence is no longer convincing. For those who require a comprehensive grounding in indexing and classification for the social sciences, either edition will suf- fice nicely. For those who need a descrip- tion of the cutting edge of the research front, however, this revision is not recom- mended.-Scott Bruntjen, Assistant Profes- sor and Head of the Ref.erence Depart- ment, Ezra Lehman Memorial Library, Shippensburg State College, Shippensburg, Pennsylvania. Advances in Librarianship. Volume 5. Edit- ed by Melvin J. Voigt. New York: Aca- demic Press, 1975. $19.50. (LC 79- Recent Publications I 521 88675) (ISBN 0-12-785005-8) In the preface to volume 1 (1970) of Advances in Librarianship, Melvin Voigt, the editor, stated that "there has long been a need for a continuing series to provide scholarly reviews of the rapidly changing and advancing field of librarianship, a se- ries which would select subjects with par- ticular current significance to the profession and provide an analysis of the advances made through research and practice." One promise of this series was that it would present critical articles and surveys based on the published literature, research in progress, and developments in different types of libraries. This volume contains nine review articles on such diverse topics as in- formation viewed as an international re- source, planning for library and information services in a number of countries, the co- ordination of technical services, sound re- cordings, and joint academic libraries. In this respect it is a readable and more or less permanently useful reference volume that comfortably takes its place beside the four earlier volumes. · Another promise of this series was that, since mechanization and automation were seen as "the most obvious of the advancing fronts · of librarianship," advances in these fields were certain to be found in every vol- ume in the series. This promise was carried out in each of the four previous volumes in a variety of special articles. No one article in volume 5 is devoted to automation, as such, but it naturally surfaces in articles like that of Helen Welch Tuttle on the "Coordination of the Technical Servi'ces." Still another promise of the series, of which Helen Tuttle is a good example, is that the authors would be experts who are closely associated with the subjects under review. Lester Asheim of the Graduate Li- brary School, University of Chicago, con- tributed "Trends in Library Education- United States," which admirably covers the most recent decade's concern about the di- rection of and the quality of education for librarians. Usefully appended to the Asheim article are the American Library Associa- tion's statement of policy called "Library Education and Manpower" and "Standards for Accreditation (1972)." Foster Mohr- hardt and Carlos Victor Penna contributed "National Planning for Library and Infor-